TED Conversations

Fábio Nunes

This conversation is closed.

Are we depriving "smaller" political party leaders of their rights when we deny them the chance to debate face-to-face with "big fishes"?

In Portugal we are to elect our next prime minister Sunday. The "fight" is between two major political parties, however there are 17 political parties running for a place in our "senate". However, face-to-face debates have only been held between the 5 biggest parties, and soon the others felt discriminated and complained in the court, winning the opportunity to participate in those debates. However, television companies complained and said that it would be not helpful or useful for the Portuguese to watch 136 debates.

So, my question is, do you think that face-to-face debates should only be held between the main candidates (Obama and McCain, to give the american 2008 example) or between every candidate?

Share:
  • thumb
    Jun 3 2011: Interesting question! Recently in Canada we had an election. In televised debates the smaller parties were not included by the televsion stations. I really resented that and i feel that all parties should have a voice.
  • Jun 3 2011: It's a vicious piece of circular logic. Nobody votes for third (or fourth, or fifth) parties because nobody votes for them enough to count.

    Ideally, each distinct policy on issues should be up for vote, but the overhead for data collection and potential distortion is way too high right now to make it viable.